Team 4: Chelsea Codd, Dana Senholzi, Terrell Wells, Joseph Kissinger

We choose Plant to Plant to Site to Site.

The rewards of Plant to Plant to Site to Site are it is the cheapest option, costing $2,509, and shipping between plants allows HazMat’s trucks to be fuller when traveling across country. Our two biggest shipments, 82 barrels and 64 barrels, are going across country and are significantly bigger than our shipments going from city to city. We view this as a reward because we are shipping large truckloads on the most cost effective cross country routes. Another reward is only two of the seven routes involve trucks travelling from city to city. If a truck were to have a spill we would rather it spill on a highway than in a city. Additionally, having fewer routes into plants reduces the number of cities that would oppose our company bringing waste into their plants. Consequently, when we ship from plant to plant it allows for the barrels to be checked more often because we are stopping more often. A risk of Plant to Plant to Site to Site is the trucks will be going from plant to plant, so the waste is not going directly to a site to be processed. The cities and environmental groups would oppose shipping into plants because they want the waste removed from the plant, rather than shipped into it. We believe that we can work with the cities and environmental groups to minimize the risks. For example, we can drive waste into the plants during the night when fewer drivers are on the road. We can also justify shipping hazardous materials into cities for the purpose of checking the barrels to make sure there are no leaks or problems. As a company shipping hazardous materials for the first time, it is important that we are cautious of spilling the waste. The ability to check the barrels more often reduces this risk. The rewards of bigger truck loads traveling across country and cost savings outweigh the risk of opposition from cities and environmental groups.

We chose Plant to Plant to Site to Site over Plant to Site shipping because the PPSS is roughly $300 cheaper and PPSS shipping allows for more barrels per truck. We prefer more barrels per truck when traveling across country to better utilize the trucks’ capacities. We choose PPSS over Plant to Plant to Site because the risk of smaller shipments going across country was too high and PPSS was roughly $150 cheaper. The one reward PPS has over PPSS is PPS has 6 cross country routes and one city to city route, so only one route is bringing waste into a plant. This option is more appealing to the cities and environmental groups. However, PPS has smaller shipments traveling long distances. PPSS has only one more city to city route, compared to PPS, while the shipments are larger and the cost is cheaper. While we would bring waste into more plants in PPSS, we would be able to check the barrels and we think being cautious justifies shipping waste into a plant. We chose PPSS over Plant to Site to Site because PSS has 8 shipping routes, while PPSS has 7 routes. Fewer routes requires less fixed costs such as training, labor or materials costs that go into setting up the delivery. Also, PSS was the most expensive shipping option with a total cost of $3,337.